On Jul 4, 2007, at 7:07 PM, Anders F Björklund wrote:
Juan Manuel Palacios wrote:
Thanks for the pointers Blair! It took me a little while to
realize I actually needed to commit the init action before
starting my merge activity, but after that it was all smooth from
there! My commit logs should illustrate what I merged and what I
left out of the branch.... so anyone interested in having or
pulling something, please do inspect the commit logs and feel free
to scream at me ;-) (I realize I left out the FreeBSD support
commits, but I'm figuring Anders will want that in? are they
stable enough to be merged at this point in the game?).
Depends on if you want FreeBSD to still work or not ?
Just seems strange to leave it in the "undead" state,
either it's revived again or it's properly buried :-)
The only reason why FreeBSD support was "left behind", as opposed to
flat out pulled, is that at the time no one seemed to be using
(Darwin)MacPorts on any platform other than Mac OS X (not even on
[pure | open]Darwin), which seems logical to me as most other
platforms already have their own packaging tools/ports trees best
suited for them. So the question was: why should we be putting <some
amount> of energy into supporting scenarios (MacPorts on another
platforms) that not only will have a very limited audience, but also
that people are likely to choose against? (seems logical to me that
they'd choose their own platform's packaging system/ports tree).
So the support was "left behind" due to a sort of generalized lack
of interest. But it was not "voted against", we never deemed it as
something we would be fundamentally opposed to, as long as there's
someone interested enough in the support to provide it him/her-
self... like you have in this case ;-) What we did agree on was,
seeing MacPorts on other platforms was almost not a real life thing,
that on refocusing solely on Mac OS X we would not stop ourselves
from using whatever Mac OS X specific technologies we could get our
hands on to improve MacPorts just for the sake of keeping it
portable... just to safeguard a portability that practically no one
was leveraging in real life (again, with good reason in my opinion)
and possibly miss out on pretty cool things Mac OS X has to offer.
The inclusion of the tcl-objc bridge is an example of this.... but,
again, there's no fundamental opposition to portability, I believe.
So if someone interested enough, like you ;-), comes along to hook up
the bridge with GNUStep to make i work on other than Mac OS X, then
big woot for that!
As team manager, I have no opposition to merging this set of changes
into the release_1_5 branch and shipping MacPorts 1.5 with FreeBSD
support again, as long as the code is stable and doesn't cause any
failures/regressions on Mac OS X, our by far main focus (cf. my
previous question on stability).
If it's just crazy old me, I can patch in here locally.
I'm not a die-hard FreeBSD fan, I just find the whole
Mac lock-in part a bit scary and want to stay portable...
I understand portability and love it and embrace it (this is ports
tree of open source software after all, and I dedicate quite a bit of
time to it ;-), so I understand your concern. But in this particular
case I do have to ask: what does portability buy not only the
MacPorts project... but MacPorts users themselves? Are they really
gonna fire up a FreeBSD box, remove its native (and much larger)
ports tree and use MacPorts? I guess I just don't understand the
motivation for that (maybe I haven't used FreeBSD's ports tree
enough, if you know what I mean ;-). But if there is an audience out
there wanting to do exactly that, then by all means! Still, however,
Mac OS X is by far our main focus and I want to safeguard that. So I
guess I could simply sum-up my position as follows: "whatever you
want, as long as it doesn't hurt our Mac OS X focus in any way....
and also as long as it's not crack smoking!" ;-) And that goes for
other platforms too, not just FreeBSD (someone using MacPorts on
Linux? ;-)
So, now to everybody.... any objections to merging FreeBSD support
into release_1_5? James and Markus? You cool? going once.... going
twice.... ;-)
With OpenDarwin gone, it looked like the easiest target.
If you do want the FreeBSD platform, I have some patches
to the dozen or so ports needed to install the RPM port.
Please, be my guest, by all means do commit!
--anders
PS. You do want to bring this one over, though: (it's a bug)
http://trac.macports.org/projects/macports/ticket/12168
Without it, *everything* will link to Foundation framework.
Landon made three commits that I've been reviewing this evening, the
one addressing this bug was the first. If FreeBSD support does go
into 1.5 this one will certainly be included.
Thanks for your dedication to extending MacPorts feature set (and
sorry for removing the autoconf tclsh tests & checks in my branch ;-)
Regards,...
-jmpp
_______________________________________________
macports-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
